Rangiora HRC 3 July 2011 – R 2 (instigating a protest 1)
ID: JCA15297
Meet Title:
Rangiora HRC - 3 July 2011
Meet Chair:
RMcKenzie
Meet Committee Member 1:
JMillar
Race Date:
2011/07/03
Race Number:
R2
Decision:
The protest was dismissed.
Facts:
Following the running of Race 2, “Dancing Holmes” Mobile Pace, an information instigating a protest was filed by Stipendiary Steward, Mr S W Wallis, against HANNAH JAYE (R J Butt), placed 3rd by the judge and subsequently promoted to 2nd following a protest, on the grounds of a breach of Rule 870 (3) and the Breaking Horses Regulation. No details of the alleged breach were set out in the information.
Mr R J Butt, driver of HANNAH JAYE, was present at the hearing of the information and he indicated that he was representing the connections of that horse.
Rule 870 provides as follows:
(3) Any horse which breaks from its gait shall promptly regain its proper gait.
(4) Any horse which breaks from its gait in any race and:-
(a) which fails to promptly regain its proper gait . . . may (in addition to any penalty imposed pursuant to Rule 1003 hereof) subject to the provisions of the Breaking Horses Regulations made by the Executive, be placed by the Judicial Committee immediately after any other horse in respect of which any advantage may have been gained.
The Breaking Horses Regulation provides as follows:
For the avoidance of doubt and in order to clarify the situation for all parties concerned, the following shall apply with regard to breaking horses:
(a) Any horse which breaks from its gait within the final 200 metres of any race and continues on in the break for a distance of 50 metres or greater, shall be deemed to be in breach of Rule 870 (3) in that it has failed to promptly regain its proper gait.
Where a protest has been duly lodged against the placing of an offending horse, the Judicial Committee shall either:
(i) relegate such horse under Rule 870 (4) to behind any other horse in respect of which an advantage may have been gained; or
(ii) disqualify it from the race under Rule 1003 (2).
Provided that where such first mentioned horse is not in the correct gait as the result of interference to such horse or its horseman, then [subject to Rule 869 (8)] such relegation or disqualification shall be at the discretion of the Judicial Committee.
Submissions for Decision:
Mr Wallis said that the Stewards were alleging that HANNAH JAYE had broken from its gait prior to the 50 metres mark and had continued in a gallop to past the finishing line, in breach of the Breaking Horses Regulation. He showed a video replay of the final stages of the race.
Mr Butt, driver of HANNAH JAYE, agreed that the horse had galloped for a distance in excess of 50 metres in the final 200 metres of the race.
Reasons for Decision:
The Committee was satisfied that, inside the final 100 metres of the race, HANNAH JAYE had gone into a gallop and had galloped for a distance in excess of 50 metres. The horse finished in 3rd placing and was subsequently promoted to 2nd placing following a protest hearing after which the Committee found that it had broken as a result of interference from SUMMERHILL JACK, placed 2nd by the judge.
Having made that finding in the earlier protest decision, the Committee was satisfied that the proviso to the Breaking Horse Regulation applied and that the Committee had a discretion whether to disqualify HANNAH JAYE. The Committee was satisfied that its discretion should be exercised in favour of not disqualifying the horse. It had broken as a result of the interference received and its progress or chance had been clearly affected.
The Stipendiary Stewards did not allege a breach of Rule 870 (5) – the lapped on Rule – and it did appear to the Committee that HANNAH JAYE was lapped on by several other runners. The Committee was satisfied that HANNAH JAYE was not in its correct gait as a result of interference and had exercised its discretion not to disqualify that runner under the protest as brought under Rule 870 (3) and the Breaking Horse Regulation. A similar proviso applies in the case of Rule 870 (5) – that is to say, the Judicial Committee has a discretion whether to relegate where the horse concerned is not in its correct gait as a result of interference. The Committee records that it would have made a similar finding had a protest been brought under the lapped on Rule and would, likewise, have exercised its discretion not to relegate HANNAH JAYE.
JCA Decision Fields (raw)
Dmitry: This section contains all JCA fields migrated from the raw data.
Data from these fields should be mapped appropriately to display amongst the standard fields above; please make note of any values below that are missing in the above standard fields but should be there.
hearingid: 804749bde26f8eeaff425737a1741e77
informantnumber: 13438
horsename:
hearing_racingtype:
startdate: no date provided
newcharge:
plea:
penaltyrequired:
decisiondate: 06/07/2011
hearing_title: Rangiora HRC 3 July 2011 - R 2 (instigating a protest 1)
charge:
facts:
Following the running of Race 2, “Dancing Holmes” Mobile Pace, an information instigating a protest was filed by Stipendiary Steward, Mr S W Wallis, against HANNAH JAYE (R J Butt), placed 3rd by the judge and subsequently promoted to 2nd following a protest, on the grounds of a breach of Rule 870 (3) and the Breaking Horses Regulation. No details of the alleged breach were set out in the information.
Mr R J Butt, driver of HANNAH JAYE, was present at the hearing of the information and he indicated that he was representing the connections of that horse.
Rule 870 provides as follows:
(3) Any horse which breaks from its gait shall promptly regain its proper gait.
(4) Any horse which breaks from its gait in any race and:-
(a) which fails to promptly regain its proper gait . . . may (in addition to any penalty imposed pursuant to Rule 1003 hereof) subject to the provisions of the Breaking Horses Regulations made by the Executive, be placed by the Judicial Committee immediately after any other horse in respect of which any advantage may have been gained.
The Breaking Horses Regulation provides as follows:
For the avoidance of doubt and in order to clarify the situation for all parties concerned, the following shall apply with regard to breaking horses:
(a) Any horse which breaks from its gait within the final 200 metres of any race and continues on in the break for a distance of 50 metres or greater, shall be deemed to be in breach of Rule 870 (3) in that it has failed to promptly regain its proper gait.
Where a protest has been duly lodged against the placing of an offending horse, the Judicial Committee shall either:
(i) relegate such horse under Rule 870 (4) to behind any other horse in respect of which an advantage may have been gained; or
(ii) disqualify it from the race under Rule 1003 (2).
Provided that where such first mentioned horse is not in the correct gait as the result of interference to such horse or its horseman, then [subject to Rule 869 (8)] such relegation or disqualification shall be at the discretion of the Judicial Committee.
appealdecision:
isappeal:
submissionsfordecision:
Mr Wallis said that the Stewards were alleging that HANNAH JAYE had broken from its gait prior to the 50 metres mark and had continued in a gallop to past the finishing line, in breach of the Breaking Horses Regulation. He showed a video replay of the final stages of the race.
Mr Butt, driver of HANNAH JAYE, agreed that the horse had galloped for a distance in excess of 50 metres in the final 200 metres of the race.
reasonsfordecision:
The Committee was satisfied that, inside the final 100 metres of the race, HANNAH JAYE had gone into a gallop and had galloped for a distance in excess of 50 metres. The horse finished in 3rd placing and was subsequently promoted to 2nd placing following a protest hearing after which the Committee found that it had broken as a result of interference from SUMMERHILL JACK, placed 2nd by the judge.
Having made that finding in the earlier protest decision, the Committee was satisfied that the proviso to the Breaking Horse Regulation applied and that the Committee had a discretion whether to disqualify HANNAH JAYE. The Committee was satisfied that its discretion should be exercised in favour of not disqualifying the horse. It had broken as a result of the interference received and its progress or chance had been clearly affected.
The Stipendiary Stewards did not allege a breach of Rule 870 (5) – the lapped on Rule – and it did appear to the Committee that HANNAH JAYE was lapped on by several other runners. The Committee was satisfied that HANNAH JAYE was not in its correct gait as a result of interference and had exercised its discretion not to disqualify that runner under the protest as brought under Rule 870 (3) and the Breaking Horse Regulation. A similar proviso applies in the case of Rule 870 (5) – that is to say, the Judicial Committee has a discretion whether to relegate where the horse concerned is not in its correct gait as a result of interference. The Committee records that it would have made a similar finding had a protest been brought under the lapped on Rule and would, likewise, have exercised its discretion not to relegate HANNAH JAYE.
Decision:
The protest was dismissed.
sumissionsforpenalty:
reasonsforpenalty:
penalty:
hearing_type: Protest
Rules: 870(3) and Breaking Horses Regulation
Informant: SW Wallis - Stipendiary Steward
JockeysandTrainer:
Otherperson:
PersonPresent: Mr RJ Butt - Driver of HANNAH JAYE
Respondent:
StipendSteward:
raceid: 731c51adb1287b8fa14ad428eb3c0c9d
race_expapproval:
racecancelled: 0
race_noreport: 0
race_emailed1: 0
race_emailed2: 0
race_title: R2
submittochair:
race_expappcomment:
race_km:
race_otherexp:
race_chair:
race_pm1:
race_pm2:
meetid: 6de408ed08f9342a867a1e05ca414505
meet_expapproval:
meet_noreport: 0
waitingforpublication: 0
meet_emailed1: 0
meet_emailed2: 0
meetdate: 03/07/2011
meet_title: Rangiora HRC - 3 July 2011
meet_expappcomment:
meet_km:
meet_otherexp:
tracklocation: rangiora-hrc
meet_racingtype: harness-racing
meet_chair: RMcKenzie
meet_pm1: JMillar
meet_pm2: none
name: Rangiora HRC